Refuting recent attacks on the Honor System

By Jay Dorman, ‘70

There have been several recent articles in the Ring-Tum Phi on the Honor System. I find the articles distressing and incredible. I should mention I am an alumnus and visit the  campus 10-15 times every year.

The articles state that the Honor System is confusing and not fully understood before  enrolling. How is this possible? The author is troubled that ignorance of the Honor  System is not a valid defense. Of course not!

The author’s first article states of our Honor System, "[T]he vast majority of students have no faith in the System.....it's a joke, no one follows it[.]" Incredible. I find it arrogant that a new arrival would dismiss a foundation of our school that has functioned for so many years.

In the subsequent article, the author concedes that a “traditional” system like ours has a higher rate of success than a “modified” — more lenient — system, even citing a study by Ohio State University. The author then cites the University of Virginia and problems with their system and their removal of the single sanction. This reference is irrelevant. I attended that university as a graduate student, and found their system to be far less effective and meaningful than ours.

The author in their third article states, "Our Honor System has no specific code for what qualifies as a violation,” and describes cheating as a "momentary lapse" and believes there are "levels of dishonorable conduct.” Although the Washington and Lee University Honor System is not codified — meaning that no particular action automatically guarantees dismissal — there has never been any question about our school’s cardinal rule: one does not lie, cheat or steal. Such behavior has and will always be ungentlemanly, unladylike, and intolerable at our institution.

I would find it distressing and unfathomable that even 1% of the student body share the author’s views. Our Honor System and the commitment to honor are the foundation of our University.

The opinions expressed in this magazine are the author's own and do not reflect the official policy or position of The Spectator, or any students or other contributors associated with the magazine. It is the intention of The Spectator to promote student thought and civil discourse, and it is our hope to maintain that civility in all discussions.